[Arm-dev] Why RPi3 under Arm32 rather than AArch64?

Thu Jan 4 21:55:40 UTC 2018
Fabian Arrotin <arrfab at centos.org>

On 04/01/18 19:26, Christopher Ursich wrote:
> Hi, all.  First-timer here.
> 
> I am setting up a new Raspberry Pi 3.  When I review the AltArch pages,
> I see that most of the RPi3 coverage is categorized under Arm32, including
> 
>   https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/AltArch/Arm32/RaspberryPi3

Because we targeted armhfp even for the Pi3 initially, as even the Pi
Foundation had no plan to provide/build at the beginning aarch64
kernel/code for the pi3
TBH (my own opinion) it doesn't even really make sense to use aarch64
code on the pi3 itself with such low specs .. only benefit is probably
that epel exists for aarch64 vs armhfp and also same tree if you want to
deploy to "real" aarch64 nodes in Datacenter ...

Now, I'll let Jim (the aarch64 maintainer) explain his plans for aarch64
tree for pi3, but at this stage of meltdown and spectre, I guess we all
have other urgent things to do too :-)

-- 
Fabian Arrotin
The CentOS Project | https://www.centos.org
gpg key: 56BEC54E | twitter: @arrfab

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/arm-dev/attachments/20180104/77eb03c0/attachment-0006.sig>